Last year I was contacted by someone with a portrait purporting to be “Mrs. Gosling” painted (in oils) by Margaret Carpenter. The idea was that it could be a portrait of my diarist, Mary Gosling. But, as she was “born” a Gosling, I discounted that idea straightaway.

That left the possibility that she represented a spouse. The probability of “Mrs. Gosling” being SOMEHOW related hung on the idea that she had come to South Africa through Houghton family connections: Elizabeth Houghton (born 1739 or 1743; died June 1811) was William Gosling’s mother, wife of Robert Gosling and sister-in-law of Sir Francis Gosling.

As you can see from the auction “ad” from 2006, the auction house placed the painter “in the circle of” Margaret Carpenter. There is no denying, however, that Mrs. Carpenter painted many members of the Smith & Gosling family – including Emma Austen, James Edward Austen, even Augusta Wilder and Spencer Smith.

I have never seen the “indistinct signature and date” that is supposed to be in the right lower corner. But I have seen the labels on the rear – which, of course, may not be contemporary with the painting.

One label queries a date – 1835? 1855? When I asked Hope Greenberg of the University of Vermont (and a fellow member of JASNA Vermont), she put the dress of the sitter to around 1840. The Gosling ladies would have been on the cusp of fashion; never a decade behind.

LOOK at all the bits and pieces that are up in the air: painter; sitter; date of the painting. Plus it made its way from England to South Africa. On the plus side that it was connected (at least anecdotally) to the Houghton family.

Also on the plus side, that it seems to have an “exhibition” (?) label, designating the painter as at an address truly associated with Margaret Carpenter (also known as Mrs. William Carpenter):

Mrs W:m Carpenter
3, Nottingham Gate
York Gate, Regent’s Park

Exhibition catalogues or Mrs. Carpenter’s own catalogue of sitters (a copy at London’s National Portrait Gallery exists) could help; at present, I have no access.

The sitter is on the younger side – so the Hon. Mrs. Gosling (née the Hon. Charlotte de Grey), William’s widow who died in October 1839, should be discounted.

So the next place to turn is the dress of the woman – who is very fashionably dressed, indeed! The hairstyle, and the jewelry, are also of interest.

It’s the long chain, VERY prominent, that made me wonder: Is it Georgina Vere Gosling? She was Mary’s sister-in-law, the only sister-in-law of the family; only Robert Gosling, the second son, ever married – William Ellis Gosling died young, unmarried; Bennett Gosling and half brother Thomas George Gosling lived longer lives, but never married either.

There is a photograph from 1865 of Georgina Vere Gosling, which I’ve seen elsewhere than online, in which she is wearing just such a chain, though it is not quite so “displayed” around the body, as on the portrait.

But Georgina (born Georgina Sullivan) was born in 1804 – and that is where another label comes into play: it seemingly claims the sitter to have been born in 1810. For the label which (in another hand) claims:

Signed Right/Hand lower/Corner.
By/Margaret/Carpenter/1835? 1855?

— each two line written on either “end” — states, in a large, beautiful, and prominent hand, the obvious intent of the label:

But the date does pose an interesting possibility: Born in 1809 was the youngest Gosling sibling, Charlotte Gosling. As Cassandra Austen once wrote that she was taking “brevet rank” — indicating that she now chose to be addressed as “Mrs. Austen” in the place of “Miss Austen,” due to her age, it’s possible that this “Mrs. Gosling” was in fact an unmarried woman, who thought herself past the age of being a “Miss”.

If she was exhibited, her title was merely “Portrait of a Lady” (again, according to the rear label). That the family did lend their private portraits to public exhibitions, at the behest of an artist, IS borne out by one letter (from 1830), in which Mary writes: “I can only sanction its being exhibited on one condition, that Mrs Carpenter should put it into another frame, as I am sure it would get knocked about, and that my Sister would not like it to be exposed to the risk.”

To anyone with further thoughts or information, the comment box awaits!

It was with GREAT surprise that I came across miniature portraits of Captain Edward Hawker and his wife (perhaps at the time, fiancée?) Joanna Naomi Poore.

Why do the young Hawkers concern us at Two Teens in the Time of Austen? Mainly, because Edward Hawker was the uncle of Fanny Smith’s husband, the Rev. Richard Seymour (son of Sir Michael Seymour and Jane Hawker.)

In addition to Jane Hawker, another sister of Edward’s was Dorothea Hawker – who marriedDr. William Knighton — another frequent name on this website, thanks to Charlotte Frost’s biography, Sir William Knighton: The Strange Career of a Regency Physician, the text of which she is offering “free” on her website Sir William Knighton.

As you can see from the “detail” of the miniature, Edward is pictured in his naval uniform. No doubt one reason why the pair sold for £1700 (after an estimate – for the two – of £100 to £150).

What excites me is that his wife’s portrait is still paired with his!

Isn’t Joanna Poore a little treasure! If you click on her image, you will be taken to a site that deals with past auctions (The Saleroom), but you can also find information on them from Dominic Winter, the auction house, by clicking the next link.

“I do not thank you for standing between me and Gosling, you would despise my thanks. I know your sentiments, and you are not ignorant of mine. But the step on your side was necessary: even with your security Gosling has not done the thing in a graceful way, and even the letter which informs me that he will honour M. de Lessert’s draught is written with unnecessary pertness. In a post or two I shall probably hear the payment acknowledged from Paris. The Goose hopes he shall soon be reimbursed: so do I likewise…”

(May 1784), p. 104 vol 2.

The “pert Goose” probably would have been William Gosling’s father, Robert Gosling (who died in January 1794); although Sir Francis Gosling is also possible. The two were banking partners. The firm typically had a third, non-family, member – Bennett, Clive, and Sharpe, being three such partners (at different times)

BUT: Oh! for a peek at that pert letter from 1784!!!

See also p. 123 – where he bemoans the loss of Lenborough – and Gosling’s “balance neatly cyphered and summed”. Gibbon (prior to this page) mentions a sum or interest in arrears: so he may not be the best client! See also p. 126 – he claims to have paid Gosling interest, but gotten no ‘rent from the estate’.

It is useful to note that YALE has items relating to the “Sale of Lenborough Manor“. Listed among the correspondents IS Robert Gosling. So if Gibbon saved the 1784 letter, it potentially could be among these items.

Edward Gibbon

In 1911, J. Pierpont Morgan purchased a small group of “letters, bills, and documents,” including a signed bond dated 1766. Gibbon’s bond secured £30,000 – an ASTOUNDING sum! “The loan payments are to be due every six months until 15 February 1771, with interest at the rate of £4 and 10 shillings per £100. Signed “Edward Gibbon” and “Edward Gibbon Junior,” and with their seals.”

With classical music sometimes hard to come by (or really boring stations playing the SAME s**t), I sometimes tune in to KDFC, in San Francisco. Graceful hosts; fine music; nice listening. Find them online at kdfc.com

And when you first “plug in” you can read through offerings like the blog post I want to mention today.

“BEWARE THE WALTZ”

Screamed the headline title.

You _know_ I had to take a look!

Even in the 1810s, my Smiths & Goslings were discussing this dance “craze”. So how wonderful to find someone delving into the history of the dance that we tend to think of as “Viennese” and from a period far later than the Regency.

“Beware the Waltz” (by Alan Chapman) of course speaks to the contact between the dancers, but also the “speed with which the dancers moved around the room” (who knew?!). A couple of useful links are embedded within the article, including the comments of LORD BYRON.

The site CAPERING & KICKERY has more on the subject of dancing, dances, and the depiction of both in drawings and illustrations.

James Boswell actually has a few connections to people in the Smith & Gosling families. I’ve already written about the GREGG family – my diarist Mary Gosling‘s Aunt Gregg (sister of Mary’s father, William Gosling) married into this family. Aunt Gregg’s husband was Henry Gregg. Henry and his sister Miss Gregg (the future Caroline Carr) can be found in diary entries by Boswell.

But my earliest Boswell *find* concerned Lady Cunliffe – Mary’s maternal grandmother – and her two daughters Mary and Eliza. Lady Cunliffe came from Chester, England and maintained ties there. It was in my second post to THIS blog, on 7 June 2008, that I first mentioned the “tie” between my Cunliffe ladies and James Boswell. And YES! 2018 will celebrate the tenth anniversary of Two Teens in the Time of Austen.

Boswell wrote A LOT – letters, diaries, memos to self even. He and his later heirs saved a LOT. But one item that slipped through, and evidently was lost BY Boswell in his lifetime, is his “Chester Journal“. I cannot say how WONDERFUL it would have been to read his words about my trio of ladies! Alas…

Based on a few letters from circa 1780, my article on Academia.edu, “Boswell’s ‘my Miss Cunliffe’: Augmenting James Boswell’s missing Chester Journal,” rectifies the misidentification of the two sisters in the original Boswell literature. They appear in the volume, The Correspondence of James Boswell with Certain members of the Club (1976); and also letters between Boswell and Margaret Stuart (née Cuninghame) in Catalogue of the Papers of James Boswell at Yale University (1993).

This article is the only place to read somuch information about Lady Cunliffe (below, in a portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds) and her daughters Mrs. Drummond Smith (Mary) and Mrs. William Gosling (Eliza).

Yesterday I found a small “treasure” – a letter, written by James Crump, in which he claims the position of BUTLER in the Roehampton Grove household of Mr. William Gosling! The letter is dated August 1820.

Roehampton Grove

Thanks to the greater volume of Smith family letters, I have some names of servants within their household. Thanks to Mary’s later diaries, especially those written after the death of her husband Charles, I have some names of servants in the household of Suttons (1830s).

This *find* was truly EXCITING! though I was disappointed in not finding MORE information about the man.

From the small cache of letters (four) found, a little of Mr. Crump’s history can be surmised:

he has a daughter-in-law

Therefore, he is older; is married or has been married; has had children – and those children are of an age to have gotten married already.

his correspondent is the Earl of Sheffield

In discussing a loan of £20, obtained from the earl in 1814, he must have been part of the earl’s household at the time of the loan. Without a census, which would have answered questions of Crump’s age and position within the household, this question cannot be easily answered. He enclosed two pounds, interest on the loan.

one letter was sent from abroad – Brussels

A LONG list of places seen, and one can guess why (in a later letter) he is hankering to get abroad again. As the old song says, “How you gonna keep ’em down on the farm (after they’ve seen Paree)”.

same 1819 letter places him in service to the Marchioness of Downshire

It was the Marchioness’ two sons – Lord George Hill and Lord Augustus Hill – with whom Mr. Crump travelled. He describes himself as being employed a year by the Marchioness; he act as courier or travelling servant for her sons. The Marchioness had been widowed in 1801; her sons were a little younger than the Gosling boys. So, at the time of their lengthy trip abroad, they were in their late teens – George, born in December 1801, was the younger of the two (Augustus being born in August 1800). They were children of the late Arthur Hill, the 2nd Marquess of Downshire, and his wife Mary Sandys.

by August 1820, Crump was Butler at Roehampton, but looking to go abroad

Two letters written in the summer of 1820 bring us up to date with Mr. Crump. In the earlier letter, he has repaid the £20 loan; in this letter of August, he thanks the earl for the return of his promissory note, and actually refers to having “lived so long in your Lordship’s service”.

It was therefore, between the Brussels letter of September 1819 and the first letter written from Roehampton Grove (July 1820) that Crump was hired as Butler.

One would think, by hinting to the earl that he would LIKE to be a travelling servant again, that Crump didn’t stay LONG in the Gosling household.

But I wonder…

Granted, an unknown name could be misread OR clumsy fingers create a typo, but I searched through letters and found young Maria Smith ending one letter with some curious news.

Maria mentions the recent move of Charlotte Gosling, the youngest Gosling sister. The very next sentence, I think, continues Gosling household news. Surely the Mr. Crump or Crumpe (difficult to tell) that Maria then mentions is tied in some manner to the Goslings. The man was soon off, to become steward to Lord Glenlyon, with a battalion of foresters and grooms to supervise. Maria added that the position would be a great change for him! Indeed, _IF_ he had been “butlering” for the past twenty years. The letter is dated 1840.

Like the surmising of James Crump’s early life with the Earl of Sheffield, we can only surmise his years (perhaps) with Lord Glenlyon. AND his years (perhaps) with the Goslings. If anyone knows further information of James Crump, please do get in touch.

Today may be the 4th of July, 2017 – but I have spent time at ETON in the early 1800s, reading letters home to Mamma. The writer is young RICHARD GOSLING, a cousin to my diarist Mary Gosling (aka Lady Smith). He was the younger son of Francis Gosling, the son of Sir Francis Gosling, knight.

One of the most puzzling things about this group of letters is a postscript written by Richard’s mother, Barbara Gosling née Baker.

Truthfully, I thought the archive must have mis-identified the writer. The hand is so “unformed”, so “elderly”. I thought for sure it must be Grandmamma!

BUT: Mary’s grandmother, who lived until 1809, wasn’t Richard’s grandmother…. And Richard’s granmother died in 1806.

Why “puzzling”, you might ask.

Because other ladies of this generation had the loveliest penmanship! Mary’s mother, for instance, had a flowing, easily-read hand. In comparison, Barbara’s hand looks “unschooled”. Reminded me a LOT of the penmanship of Sarah Smith, Emma Austen’s maternal grandmother.

And therein lies the puzzle. To know more of Barbara’s background and education, to assess how she and Francis came to know one another and marry may be something I never learn. Gosling items are thinner on the ground than Smith items.

Francis and Barbara Gosling married MUCH earlier than William and Eliza Gosling (my Mary’s parents). Francis and Barbara in 1777; William and Eliza nearly twenty years later in 1793.

3 March 1777, Gentleman’s Magazine

So Barbara has a London address; Francis’ lists not his abode so much as the banking firm’s address – Fleet Street. But the family is often identified as “of Fleet Street” bcause of the family firm.

I sometimes refer to Richard’s father Francis (though being a ‘knight’ Sir Francis’ title did not devolve to his son) as Francis II. Richard’s brother therefore becomes Francis III. Thank Goodness for a name like Richard – instead of the trail of Francises and Roberts in this portion of the Gosling family tree. No guesswork required, in deciphering who was the letter recipient.

Richard was far enough down the chain of children to be of an age with the Gosling sons:

Mary’s brother William Ellis Gosling arrived, aged 17, at Brasenose College, Oxford in 1812. Her brother Robert, aged 18, arrived at Christ Church in January 1814. Richard, aged 19, arrived in November 1814. Bennett, aged 18, followed in March 1815. These last two were also at Christ Church, like Robert. The family visited William and Robert in college in the summer of 1814. Mary left a diary of this trip.

To get back to Barbara for a moment, with several “Mrs Goslings” listed among the output of certain painters, I long ago hunted down a photograph of a Mrs Gosling that is believed to be Barbara; the portrait is by Reynolds:

I thinkI went on the hunt for this portrait in order to clear up how a sitter’s ARMS are described – to an onlooker, Barbara’s arm could be described as the left arm; but a portrait would be discussed as if the viewer WERE the sitter: “right arm across the body“. Most do not give a first name, or ID the woman as “wife of …. Gosling”.

As you might guess, there are multiple “Mrs Goslings” done by the regarded portraitists of the day.

* * *

A bit of housekeeping: WordPress has obviously had an upgrade, which interrupted the “facebook” connection – and it won’t reconnect. After the run-around I went thru with AirBnB over the weekend – I am in NO MOOD. Will just say: why don’t websites TEST before they launch. And it’s not just websites – have had problems with Windows 10 AND with Office 365 for the iPad. Am utterly TIRED of being told they’re “ironing out bugs”. Do it BEFORE it impacts your customers!
(Rant over.)

More than a decade ago I worked on a typescript of a diary; this now has been turned into a book by the Saint Michael’s College (History Department) professor I used to work with, Dr. Susan Ouellette.

An Extraordinary Ordinary Woman: The Journal of Phebe Orvis, 1820-1830tells – in her own words – the story of Phebe Orvis, born in Vermont and educated in Middlebury; her marriage to Samuel Eastman settled them in Upstate New York. So, geographically, the diary is much involved with the area near where I live.

Spent a little time in the local Barnes & Noble yesterday. Found two books that were of GREAT interest due to their topics (both were biographies of British women); but both became “maybe I’ll find them in the library?” after reading reviews. One – and I must confess, the one I thought most likely to be purchased – exhibits such an annoying writing style, that I rather prefer to revert to an old biography instead. Or, the lady’s letters. Both subjects were QUITE known for the high caliber of their writing….

But it was in looking up customer reviews that I found the soon-to-be released (July in the UK; November in the US) Amberley publication that should hold its interest: The Real Persuasion: An Intimate Portrait of a Real-Life Austen Heroine, by Peter James Bowman.

I’m less intrigued by parallels with Austen’s Anne Elliot of Kellynch Hall that Bowman promises to tease out, than with learning more about his diarist and letter writer Katherine Bisshopp. Thank goodness for the unusual spelling… I think I found some of his source material, thanks to The Diary Junction. According to this, born in 1791, Katherine’s diaries run from 1808 until 1834.

Even MORE intriguing now that I see her married name. Lady Pechell, Katherine’s future mother-in-law, actually turns up in diaries _I_ have access to. As do many other Pechells, including Capt and Mrs. Pechell.

And EVEN MORE intriguing once I look at a Pechell family genealogy published in the 1840s: there is a connection to Berkhamstead (which comes into play for the Two Teens in the Time of Austen with Sir John Culme-Seymour); a connection to the Smiths of Ashlyns Hall (Tring Park neighbors of Mamma Smith, Emma & Edward Austen); and a connection to the Thoyts of Sulhamstead House (the very estate that comes into the Wilder family).

I couldn’t get much closer to home, if I tried.

So what is The Real Persuasion about?

According to the Amberley website, “Her father is a vain, foolish baronet, obsessed with his lineage but forced to quit his ancestral seat as a result of his own improvidence. Her sister is a fretful invalid with a good-natured husband and two disobedient sons. She herself falls in love with a handsome naval officer, and he with her, but his income and prospects are judged inadequate by her proud family. Heartbroken, the lovers part: he goes to sea while she leads a forlorn life at home. Years later he returns, having made a fortune in prize money, and after further misunderstandings he claims as his bride the woman he has never ceased to love“.

What intrigues me, though:

“Using the sisters’ letters and journals, as well as other family correspondence, Peter James Bowman paints an intimate picture of life in a Regency family, and looks at the remarkable parallels between the true story of the Bisshopps and the fictional narrative of Jane Austen’s final novel. Whether their subject is daily life at the Bisshopps’ family seat of Parham; the social round in London, Brighton and elsewhere; or Katherine’s eleven-year courtship with George Pechell, the writers of these hitherto unpublished documents are brought to life through their own unaffected language, charmingly evocative of its time, and the author’s engaging insight into life in Jane Austen’s“.

Weighing in at 336 pages, Bowman has pages enough to expound upon, and hopefully expends more time on, the fascinating Bisshopps and Pechells, than on finding parallels to Austen’s novel, Persuasion. After all, Austen died in 1817 and the Pechells didn’t marry until 1826. As mentioned with the Hicks-Beach diary, “few will have heard of … but attach the name ‘Jane Austen’….” We shall see, once the book is released. For now, at least, I’m eagerly awaiting its release.

In the meanwhile, readers can dip into Bowman’s earlier biography, The Fortune Hunter: A German Prince in Regency England – which tells the story of Prince Pückler-Muskau, who wrote of the Ladies of Llangollen as “The two most celebrated virgins in Europe”.

Letters at Castle Ashby, according to the book The History of the Comptons of Compton Wynyates, put a certain “Miss Stanhope” at the eye of the storm during the lengthy courtship of Emma’s cousin Lord Compton and the eldest of the three Clephane daughters of Torloisk, Margaret Douglas Maclean Clephane, in circa 1813. The girls come into the purview of the Smiths once there is actually an engagement – in 1815! Yes, it took that long; Lord Compton moved at a snail’s pace, even after confessing to his mother that he was wishing to marry Miss Clephane.

It is always so nice when further information appears – especially when from an old book. The Letter-bag of Lady Elizabeth Stanhope is indeed related to the Stanhopes known by the future Lady Compton. She even appears – only once – though under the name “Lady Crompton”.

[just in case the U of California’s volumes disappear or are incomplete, there are other volumes available; beware of “new” reprints with limited accessibility]

The eldest Miss Stanhope, Marianne, was born on 23 May 1786 “about 7 o’clock in the morning” (writes her mother) in their house in Grosvenor Square, London. She was therefore a few years older than Margaret (born in 1791). It was her brother, whose life we follow through his sister’s letters in The Letter-bag, John Spencer-Stanhope who succeeded father Walter to the estate of Cannon Hall, Yorkshire. Marianne married later in life: March 1828 saw her become the wife of Robert Hudson of Tadworth Court (near Reigate). She died (aged 76) in 1862. [An age Lady Compton (later the 2nd Marchioness of Northampton) never attained. Margaret died in 1830.]

The wonderful silhouette of Marianne comes from the book; and her sisters (and Mother) are also represented!

Anne Stanhope has such a characterful face! She “was born September 7th, 1788, between 6 & 8 in the Morning at Cannon Hall”. Anne never married. She died (aged 72) in 1860.

Isabella Stanhope, their “eleventh Child, was born on the 20th of October 1797, at one in the morning”. She, too, never married. She lived until 1857 (aged 60).

Frances Mary Stanhope, child number 13, was, like her eldest sister, born in Grosvenor Square, “on the 27th of June, 1800, at 1/2 past twelve at Noon”. She lived until the age of 85, and also lived in the state of blessed singleness.

Maria Alicia Stanhope “was born at Cannon Hall,” like several of her sisters, “the 4th of September 1802, 1/2 before seven in the Morning”. Maria died the year before Frances (in 1884), aged 82. She, too, never married.

Much from the Cannon Hall archives can be found at Bradford’s West Yorkshire Archive Service, including many of the letters included in The Letter-bag of Lady Elizabeth Stanhope – who, by the way, married the heir.

Claimed as the “bosom friend” of Margaret Clephane, Miss Stanhope and others of the Spencer-Stanhope family appear from time to time in Smith & Gosling family correspondence. Their own correspondence, as edited by A.M.W. Stirling is highly recommended.